~ politics for the people

New angle on an old lie: The return of ‘Jeremy the Jew-hater’

Michael Foster is angry that his accusation of anti-Semitism against Jeremy Corbyn – and claim that the Labour leader’s supporters are like Nazi stormtroopers – are evidence that he has not conducted himself in a calm, polite and respectful manner towards other members. He seems to think he should be above the rules that have been used to deny thousands of other party members their vote in the Labour leadership election (they say they have been treated falsely, too) [Image: Reuters].

I was mystified by its appearance as the author – a former Corbyn policy advisor named Joshua Simons – seemed to be simply regurgitating old claims about the Labour leader that have long-since been laid to rest.

The article deliberately confuses Judaism with Zionism with the political organisation that is the Israeli state, in order to create a false effect of anti-Semitism by Mr Corbyn: “In the eyes of the leaders of the British far left, Israel’s occupation – for some, even Israel’s existence – offers a firm moral basis for antipathy towards Jews in Israel or, more ambitiously, towards Jews everywhere.”

What a good thing Mr Corbyn isn’t a member of the British far left, then! (He’s centre-left.) People who are of that political persuasion may wish to take issue with Mr Simons.

The author resurrects the old story about Jews being bankers, financiers, money-lenders and usurers – apparently for no reason because it hasn’t been an issue in recent dialogues. It seems to me that the reason may soon become clear.

The article contradicts itself: “Antisemitism is not rife in the British Labour party, quite the opposite in fact,” it states – then continues: “We are left cold by a Labour leader who, some believe, seemed willing to trade a peerage for a favourable report into anti-Semitism.” Why would he have to do that? Mr Simons has admitted there isn’t rampant anti-Semitism in the Labour Party so there’s no reason to suggest Mr Corbyn paid off Shami Chakrabarti for a cover-up.

“It is only thought to be [anti-Semitic] because Labour is currently led by a team whose political identity is driven first and foremost by a visceral contempt for America and for Israel,” Mr Simons continues. But ill-feeling about Israel’s political decisions is not anti-Semitic, no matter how often or how loudly the more strident Zionists claim it is. Again he contradicts himself by adding: “It is not at all true that antisemitism exists because of the Jewish state” and “Young Jewish people in Britain should not give up their criticisms of Israel’s policies.”

More interesting, to me, was the fact that he is a former policy advisor. Why did he quit? Does he have an ulterior motive in resurrecting these claims?

Yes, it’s in the Heil on Sunday, and even the headline is inaccurate. Jeremy Corbyn cannot purge anybody from the Labour Party. As still-sitting NEC member Johanna Baxter has told us, the NEC purges are carried out by three-member panels – and Mr Corbyn isn’t on any of them. I’m aware her reputation for truthfulness is in question after her behaviour in the run-up to the NEC meeting at which Mr Corbyn was allowed to defend his leadership without having to seek nominations from Labour MPs, but I believe she was telling the truth about this because it is verifiable.

Of course, the Heil won’t let facts like that get in the way of a good story, and this one is an old chestnut: Corbyn the anti-Semite. Jeremy the Jew-hater.

Mr Foster, although not in the financial sector (he’s a former showbusiness agent), has donated more than £400,000 to the Labour Party. Is that enough to justify a link with Mr Simons’s comments about Jews being financiers and money-lenders? If so, then the reason for the Guardian article may have become clearer.

The Heil article is full of anti-Semitism accusations against Mr Corbyn and, following Mr Simons’s piece, it seems possible that some kind of co-ordinated attack is going on.

Why?

Well, it seems a large number of left-wing Labour members are being purged from the party at the same time. These include Broxtowe CLP chairman Pete Radcliff among many others.

Is the removal of this high-profile right-winger being highlighted in order to hide the many low-profile left-wing purges?

If so, it has failed.

The left-wing purges were announced first – by the victims, on the social media. This Blog’s article was one mention among many. Sure, the Heil article is more high-profile but its thunder has been taken by the left-wing purges.

Note also the discrepancy of a Jewish man falsely accusing the Labour leader in the pages of a right-wing newspaper whose owner supported the Nazis in the run-up to World War II. That’s why we call it the Heil.

In any case, why would right-wing Labour want to obscure the purging of another large number of left-wingers? Is there a motive, beyond hiding that the left-wing is taking far more such hits than those on the right?

Yes, I think there is.

On Twitter, Eoin Clarke tells us: “A growing number of the people being purged are conference attendees who are delegated to vote in support of Jeremy Corbyn’s proposals.”

That would leave the way clear for the right-wingers of Progress and Labour First to ‘fix’ the Labour conference.

Labour First has been contacting like-minded party members who will be delegates at the conference, in order to secure their support for anti-Corbyn resolutions.

With fewer pro-Corbyn delegates at the conference (purged members are forbidden to attend), the right-wing measures would be far more likely to gain approval and Mr Corbyn will have a much more difficult job than otherwise.

The intention would be either to push him out by making his job impossible, or to lay him open to criticism that would finally shame him into giving up – because Labour’s right wing now accepts that he’ll win the leadership election by a huge majority.

This is the real dichotomy in the Labour Party at the moment.

Mr Corbyn may be accused of the most vile behaviour – falsely. Meanwhile, just look at the underhand tactics employed against him.

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

14 thoughts on “New angle on an old lie: The return of ‘Jeremy the Jew-hater’”

Of course, if Jez were determined to prove his commitment to purging anti-semitism, a good start would have been a visit to Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum. But according to news reports, he was too busy. Funny how he wasn’t too busy to hold a press conference with fellow 80s renegades UB40, eh?

Why should Corbyn kowtow to somebody else’s agenda, especially when it will be twisted by the right-wing media into some pathetic attempt to shore up his credentials as not being anti-Semitic? Something he does not have to prove, except in the fevered minds of that anti-Corbyn lobby.

The ‘agenda’ is the agenda of the Israeli Labor Party – our sister party – who were so alarmed at the climate in the British Labour Party that they made the request. Not the MSM. Not Progress. Not any other of the mythical foes of the great Jez. And his response? He’s too busy. That speaks volumes to me.

I’m sure he’ll get his bag of silver, but it leaves me starting to wonder what the new regime at The Guardian are up to … especially how so many of the pro-Israel/”Labour anti-semitism” articles are censored for open discussion.

In another article is Huffington, he gets it all wrong again portraying the context as “two sets of peoples, the Arab Palestinians and Israelis, have been at war, on and off, for over fifty years”.

Kind of forgets the genocidal terrorism of the early Zionist state, the ethnic cleansing of the early to middle period, and the illegal occupation and disproportionate violence and agression of the current period, does not it?

If Jez bows and scraps to the Zionist he will be classed as a good lad if he backs the mass murder of palestinians then the media will like him he should tell them where to go the are some very good Jews I think would back me

I just watched Emily Thornberry being “interviewed” by Dermot Whatshisname on SKY News. Brought up the old chestnut about antisemitism in the Labour Party. Whoa! Emily stood her ground brilliantly against such stupid questions. I have a lot of praise for her refusing to be drawn into a petty debate about in not knowing the name of the French Foreign Minister (they seem to change on a daily basis anyway!) or the name of the South Korean President! These clever dick Murdoch News people think they are oh so clever don’t they?:Does Monghan know the name of the Finnish Interior Minister? I love Emily for standing her ground!

It is the dishonest accusations by certain pro Israel and Zionism extremists that is irritating so many Brits who are now well and truly inured against the over worn sympathy card which has been played too many times to silence criticism of the disgusting Israeli apartheid regime. Unfortunately all Jews are being tarred with the same brush as these Zionist pro Israeli extremists which has resulted in a rise of Anti Jewish animosity especially as these radicalised extremists have attempted to conflate the two issues of anti apartheid with anti semitism. More and more people are becoming aware of the horrors Israel perpetuates daily against a defenceless (unlike Israel who was armed and trained by the British/US whilst Palestinians were denied an army or police force and murdered for carrying guns) peoples and it is angering them. For many years the sympathy card worked, but no more, it is actually working against them. We can hope that the Jewish societies in Britain will become more outspoken against these extremists in an attempt to deflect hatred of Jews before it becomes as prevalent as Islamaphobia – sooner rather than later. Bigotry whether it is Jews against the Goyim or any Brits against Jews, should have no place in a supposedly civilised country such as Britain.